AMD Flies the European Flag After Intel Fine

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, if Intel broke EU laws, they should pay. But why does the EC get the money? Shouldn't AMD get it?

This is like class action suits in the US, where the lawyers run off with the money.
 
Regardless of the verdict in this case, the way AMD is acting is a show of poor sportsmanship. It's best to let others speak of your triumph rather than showing if off yourself.
 
AMD was wronged, but I don't think shows much class. I've been running AMD chipsets on all my builds but Intel's taking their licks, I don't think trying to rub salt in the wound is the right approach.
 
I don't mind it (the flag on the website). A little amusing, sure, but not much more than that. It is nice to see the win for fair competition though
 
I just happened to go to the AMD website the day the verdict was in. I couldn't believe that they actually were gloating over this in this way while I was trying to download drivers.
I thought it was hilarious and sad at the same time.
They should spend more time and money advertising and less hoping for verdicts from governments.
 
[citation][nom]DXrick[/nom]Well, if Intel broke EU laws, they should pay. But why does the EC get the money? Shouldn't AMD get it?This is like class action suits in the US, where the lawyers run off with the money.[/citation]

The EU is representing the millions of European customers who were affected by Intel's actions. This is not really about Intel vs AMD, although that is a small part of it. The EU issued this fine because they felt Intel's actions harmed consumers.

The European Commission does not exist to fight on the behalf of AMD. If AMD feels Intel's actions were anticompetitive (which it clearly does) it needs to address that issue with its own lawsuit.

The money from Intel goes to the EU's central budget, which reduces the contributions that Member States pay to the EU. In other words, that money goes to the countries who were affected by Intel's actions.
 
Well it sure has made me laugh hard. AMD must really hate Intel. Regardless It is interesting to see the two companys turn into children with one having stolen from the cookie jar and the other tattling , then shoving it in his face. xD It's like saying "HAHA! Intel got grounded!"
 
DXrick; It's like so many things that people get fined for. If your employer doesn't follow proper regulations and violates your rights, he gets fined and you get nothing. If AMD wants money, though, I don't see why they can't go after Intel with their own lawyers. I could be wrong, but the government decision should provide a legal precedent for Intel having been responsible for financial damages.
 
While im glad that intel got nailed and i do like AMD because it lets you get a good system without a ton of cash, the fact that it is in the middle of their homepage is kind of childish, they could have atleast been a bit more subtle about their gloating.
 
Since forever I've seen this "driving out of business" talks from AMD and I think that if EU found Intel guilty you HAVE to let your customers know that you were right all along. Why not? They fought for it, they have the right to it.
 
+1^ The EU is representing the people of europe that got ripped off and robbed by intel. The money goes directly to the economy which is then for the people of europe.
 
Hm, defending AMD will be poor sportsmanship!?! What sportsmanship is Intel showing? braking sportsman laws?

So if you cheat during sport is ok, but if you get cought from the judges and others aknowledge then they are not sportsmens ?!?

Wow, a lot of reason in this bullshit I smell.

Intel is wrong and was not playing by the rules. They must pay, and instead of defending them you must be happy because all this is in our favor the consumers.
 
Firmly in the "who cares" camp. I do find the "sportsmanship" comments amusing. It's not sport, it's business. Business is war without guns (well, except for arms dealers). The only reason there are rules has to do with the socialist nature of the governments (United States included, anti-trust laws are not pure capitalist, they are socialist). In a pure capitalist economy, the business goal "IS" monopoly. 100% market share is the best you can do, so why shoot for less. Well, because there are laws... 🙂
 
This is pathetic by AMD, and quite frankly disgusts me. I was a big AMD fan when Jerry Sanders was running the company, but since Hector Ruiz took over, the company has had no class, and no direction. I see his leaving has not changed anything.

Big companies remain above petty pot-shotting. AMD should have been big, and said something like "it's unfortunate Intel had to pay this type of fine, but we felt it was necessary for our future to have a level competitive landscape". Or, "Intel is a fine competitor, and has added much value and innovation to the computer world. We feel like this should be the basis for their sales, and is something we feel we can match them in. We are happy these issues are behind us so the market can make decisions on the merits of our products alone." This is just pathetic, and makes me much less likely to buy AMD processors. It's so small time. Do you think Intel would have done the same? They never gloated when they crushed AMD with their superior products, and that is how big companies act. IBM was the same way, they never insulted anyone, or took petty pride in their undoings, at least publicly.

It's low class, from a company that has become low class. It is just not how businesses should act. Everyone knows this. Why didn't AMD???

It's particularly pathetic because they have such inferior products to Intel. It's coming from a position of weakness, not strength, and they just come off as a squeaking mouse.
 
[citation][nom]erichlund[/nom]Firmly in the "who cares" camp. I do find the "sportsmanship" comments amusing. It's not sport, it's business. Business is war without guns (well, except for arms dealers). The only reason there are rules has to do with the socialist nature of the governments (United States included, anti-trust laws are not pure capitalist, they are socialist). In a pure capitalist economy, the business goal "IS" monopoly. 100% market share is the best you can do, so why shoot for less. Well, because there are laws... 🙂[/citation]

Business is war but it's as much about PR as is it anything else. This is the equivilent to AMD teabagging Intel after a particularly bad beat down. As another poster said it's funny and sad all at the same time.
 
[citation][nom]rawsteel[/nom]Hm, defending AMD will be poor sportsmanship!?! What sportsmanship is Intel showing? braking sportsman laws?So if you cheat during sport is ok, but if you get cought from the judges and others aknowledge then they are not sportsmens ?!?Wow, a lot of reason in this bullshit I smell.Intel is wrong and was not playing by the rules. They must pay, and instead of defending them you must be happy because all this is in our favor the consumers.[/citation]

Maybe a better word would be "lack of class." It doesn't matter if you're right, you don't rub your opponents nose in it. Bad karma man, and it'll bite them in the rear one day.
 
AMD didn't win anything, they are not getting paid anything. They are actually a completely seperate third party in this lawsuit. Intel earned this fine, and the bad publicity it has produced for them. Not to say that this will not help AMD, but it isn't selling their chips, just giving them a chance to sell them, the consumers will still decide who is more popular.

I am not a fanboy in anyway, never have been, and probably never will run AMD, Intel is just faster, even if a little more expensive.
 
I don't get it. Why is it lack of class? I personally am an intel person but I don't see any problem with what AMD is doing. It is their choice and it's not like they are making it up. Plus there might actually be people who don't visit tom's or other tech sites but happen to venture to AMD's site for whatever reason and are unaware of the news. And just maybe they are trying to emphasize the character or lack there of this shows of Intel as a company and not themselves.

Sometimes you have to look outside your world. I think a lot of people are commenting based on this being overly common news. Which in the tech world it probably is but the tech world isn't the only one. I have yet to have seen this on the news in the morning when I wake up. Granted I might have missed it. But if I did then it definitely wasn't nearly as thorough as the news on the presidents dog and now the news on the toys they are making to resemble it (beanie baby type toys or something or other).

Also, is it no class or lack there of that Apple's commercials with the PC dude point out problems I am sure all of us here have experienced at least one of with Microsoft?
 
Anti-trust legislation is stupid. If Intel has created a near monopoly for itself by providing the vastly superior product for a few years, it deserves every bit of that market share.
 
[citation][nom]mpomnis[/nom]Anti-trust legislation is stupid. If Intel has created a near monopoly for itself by providing the vastly superior product for a few years, it deserves every bit of that market share.[/citation]
Anti-trust legislation is not stupid. Certainly if a company is simply making a better product, and other companies fall off the map, that is fine. The problem comes when they are doing anti-competitive practices, such as taking a loss on your product to put another company out of business, exercising anti-competitive contracts with suppliers that does not reflect the actual profits of the product and so on.
I don't know if Intel has recently gone into these practices, but MS has been known to do this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom